Uganda’s courtroom clash: colonial titles at the heart of reform debate
Uganda’s legal community is locked in a symbolic battle over how justice should be seen and spoken. The Uganda Law Society (ULS) has instructed lawyers to abandon colonial honorifics such as “My Lord” and “My Lady,” arguing they elevate judges above citizens. The judiciary has pushed back, insisting that decorum in court is non‑negotiable.
In its directive, the ULS described bowing and deferential titles as “archaic” practices that force Ugandans into “postures of humiliation.” The society urged advocates to instead use plain forms of address, “Mr Justice,” “Madam Judge,” or simply surnames, as part of a broader effort to “decolonise justice and restore dignity.”
Judiciary spokesperson James Ereemye dismissed the directive, telling the BBC that the ULS had no authority to dictate courtroom conduct. He said judges would continue to demand “the known decorum” from lawyers, describing the society as “just a section of young people” who misunderstand how policy is set.
Uganda’s legal system, like many across Africa, inherited traditions from Britain, wigs, robes, bows, and titles. Critics argue these symbols perpetuate hierarchy rather than equality. Supporters say they preserve respect for the bench. The clash reflects a deeper question: should African courts shed colonial rituals to embrace modern, citizen‑focused justice?
Uganda is not alone. Kenya’s former Chief Justice Willy Mutunga famously took his oath in a suit in 2011, rejecting wigs and robes. Zimbabwe, Malawi, and Ghana have all debated whether colonial courtroom attire and practices remain relevant. Across the continent, reformers see symbolism as inseparable from substance in the quest to modernise justice.
For now, Uganda’s judges remain firm, while lawyers press for change. The dispute is more than etiquette; it is about who sets the tone of justice and whether the courtroom should reflect colonial tradition or contemporary African identity.
Source: BBC
About The Author
